On Fri, 9 Apr 2010 12:40:50 +0530
Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
> Hello!
>
> So, I can't find any documentation about this; nor can I find a
> best-practices list. Can we add broken ebuilds in-tree as long as they
> are package.masked? automagic deps, wrong deps, missing deps, file
> collisions, etc e
On Thu, 8 Apr 2010 21:37:46 +
Sylvain Alain wrote:
>
> The official wiki can be use by powerusers who want to write some pretty good
> doc.
>
> A lot of powerusers can write excellent doc on the gentoo forum right now, so
> they don't need to by Gentoo Dev to right excellent stuff.
>
> I
On Thu, 8 Apr 2010 22:13:07 +0200
Ben de Groot wrote:
> On 8 April 2010 21:51, Ryan Hill wrote:
> > why are we setting up a user wiki when a very popular one already exists?
>
> Because some devs request things like this:
>
> > can we can lock certain pages down to dev
On Mon, 5 Apr 2010 20:12:49 +0200
Ben de Groot wrote:
> After the mostly positive feedback on the recent wiki discussion, we
> have now gone ahead, formed a preliminary team consisting of both
> users and developers, and put up a project page [1]. All constructive
> feedback on this new project i
On Sun, 14 Mar 2010 11:21:13 +0200
Petteri Räty wrote:
> You misunderstood what I meant. The action I am talking about is
> reopening the bug. Any developer who notices that a bug should be
> reopened should reopen it so it gets noticed.
Sorry, my mistake.
--
fonts,
On Sat, 13 Mar 2010 19:07:41 +0200
Petteri Räty wrote:
> When a bug is marked as fixed it doesn't show up in searches developers
> use so it's a matter of who reads the email and acts upon it. I don't
> see why maintainers would be any more likely to act than an arch team
> comprised of multiple
On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 18:33:12 +0100
Ben de Groot wrote:
> On 12 March 2010 16:59, Alexis Ballier wrote:
> > Or like the old gtk-1: completely abandon the package and let the
> > consumers upgrade slowly. IMHO this is the less annoying approach for
> > everyone.
>
> Abandoned packages do not belo
On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 21:18:03 +0200
Petteri Räty wrote:
> There seems to be two different schools on who to assign a keywording
> bug with only a single arch. I have myself assigned it to the arch in
> question but there's a difference of opinion here:
> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2721
On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 09:41:59 -0500
Mark Loeser wrote:
> As Mike said, for ones with maintainers, don't touch them unless you
> have explicit permission. We have maintainers for a reason, and if you
> don't know the intricacies of the package, you shouldn't be touching it.
> You should know how i
On Sat, 6 Mar 2010 19:09:28 +
David Leverton wrote:
> On Saturday 06 March 2010 15:26:10 Ioannis Aslanidis wrote:
> > Well, I personally would prefer to have two keywords at least, one for
> > candidates and another for confirmed bugs.
>
> This sounds like the sort of thing Bugzilla's "flags
On Sun, 7 Mar 2010 12:11:47 -0500
Mark Loeser wrote:
> > Has QA given their blessing to this?
>
> Absolutely not. Its actually the opposite. Until 90+% of the tree just
> works with the new version of python, it should not be stabilized. The
> stable tree should all Just Work together. Stabi
# Ryan Hill (05 March 2010)
# No release since 2004, succeeded by nicotine+
# Removal April 5, 2010 - bug #307971
net-p2p/pysoulseek
--
fonts,by design, by neglect
gcc-porting, for a fact or just for effect
wxwidgets
On Fri, 5 Mar 2010 13:37:28 +0100
Ben de Groot wrote:
> On 5 March 2010 12:24, Zac Medico wrote:
> > It won't be pulled in by sys-apps/portage dependencies which look
> > like this:
> >
> > || ( dev-lang/python:2.8 dev-lang/python:2.7 dev-lang/python:2.6
> >>=dev-lang/python-3 )
> >
> > If you
On Fri, 05 Mar 2010 13:12:36 +0200
Petteri Räty wrote:
> Because there is so little benefit from removing old functions. What is
> so bad about having them grouped at the bottom of the file inside a
> deprecated section?
Because then people use them. Don't ask me why. I have things I deprecate
On Thu, 4 Mar 2010 10:43:00 +0100
Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> > On Thu, 04 Mar 2010, Petteri Räty wrote:
>
> >> I think removal of functions is a special case of "Adding and
> >> Updating Eclasses" and we already have a policy for this.
>
> > Removing functions needs a migration plan. For examp
On Thu, 04 Mar 2010 22:08:06 +0100
Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> So now that we have a new category "dev-vcs" we need to move suitable
> stuff over there. Moving packages is complex and error prone:
> This mail tries to guide you through and summarize the process, please
> read on.
>
> [stuff]
Al
On Wed, 03 Mar 2010 17:55:41 +0200
Petteri Räty wrote:
> On 03/03/2010 02:40 PM, Ryan Hill wrote:
> > Is this actually documented anywhere? Or is this another of our
> > "this-is-policy-because-everyone-knows-it's-policy" policies? I know there
> > was a te
> Dne 3.3.2010 12:32, Joshua Saddler napsal(a):
> > On Wed, 03 Mar 2010 13:35:10 +0200
> > Samuli Suominen wrote:
> >
> >> # Samuli Suominen (03 Mar 2010)
> >> # Masked for QA, security
> >> #
> >> # Internal copies of vuln. zlib, jpeg, speex and likely
> >> # others
> >> #
> >> # http://bugs.ge
On Wed, 03 Mar 2010 13:09:49 +0200
Petteri Räty wrote:
> On 3.3.2010 11.23, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
> > 2010/3/3 Tomáš Chvátal :
> Removing eclass functions like this is not allowed by current policy. If
> you want to do it, you should discuss about changing policy.
> >>>
> >>> ?!
> >>>
On Wed, 03 Mar 2010 08:52:55 +0200
Petteri Räty wrote:
> On 03/02/2010 08:27 PM, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote:
> > Members of Gentoo Python Project have agreed to deprecate the following
> > functions
> > in EAPI <=2:
> > - python_version()
> > - python_mod_exists()
> > - pyth
On Sat, 27 Feb 2010 05:18:39 +0100
Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> I'm surprised that there is no keyword in Gentoo's bugzilla [1] to mark
> bugs for bugday. Is there a good reason why such a keyword does not
> exist? Would it be hard to set up?
I would use it. I honestly didn't know we still did
On Thu, 25 Feb 2010 11:30:32 +0100
Torsten Veller wrote:
> * Torsten Veller :
> > Can we please move the mips profiles from "dev" to "exp" in
> > profiles/profiles.desc?
>
> Based on the current feedback I'll change it not earlier than friday
> next week if nobody objects.
Did you get feedback
On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 10:11:25 +0100
"Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote:
> On 2/21/10 5:08 AM, Ryan Hill wrote:
> > I have one simple request. When you make a non-trivial change to an ebuild
> > -
> > a patch, a version bump, anything that can effect the behaviour of the
&g
(this isn't directed at any one person or group or any recent incident, this
has been bugging me for years)
I have one simple request. When you make a non-trivial change to an ebuild -
a patch, a version bump, anything that can effect the behaviour of the
package - please run the test suite. If
On Thu, 18 Feb 2010 23:33:42 +0100
Tomáš Chvátal wrote:
> Hi,
> we prepared new eclass for x11 packages that should be used as
> replacement for x-modular.eclass.
>
> After long discussion with others on irc we choose to name it as
> xorg-2.eclass.
>
> Whats new/changed:
> Fonts handling sligh
# Ryan Hill (16 Feb 2009)
# Masked for removal in 30 days, bug #305471.
# Abandoned upstream, no releases in years.
dev-util/documancer
x11-libs/wxmozilla
--
fonts,by design, by neglect
gcc-porting, for a fact or just for
On Mon, 01 Feb 2010 14:29:19 +0100
Tomáš Chvátal wrote:
> Dne 1.2.2010 14:14, Peter Volkov napsal(a):
> > 1.
> > -FONT_SUFFIX=${FONT_SUFFIX:-}
> > +: ${FONT_SUFFIX:=}
> >
> > What are the benefits of this change? Personally I prefer first syntax
> > more since it's more evident and does not need
On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 15:29:48 +0200
Petteri Räty wrote:
> On 01/12/2010 12:23 AM, Brian Harring wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 09:25:51PM +0100, Raaal Porcel wrote:
> >> scarabeus told me that the eclass can't be removed until two years since
> >> the deprecation date, so...
> >>
> >> Removal
On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 12:30:30 +0100
Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote:
> > diff -u -r1.15 -r1.16
> > --- abiword-2.4.6.ebuild4 Jan 2009 22:51:26 - 1.15
> > +++ abiword-2.4.6.ebuild17 Dec 2009 10:54:05 - 1.16
> [...]
> > @@ -65,12 +65,12 @@
> >
> > src_install() {
> > do
On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 20:46:18 +0100
Diego E. Pettenò wrote:
>
> # Diego E. Pettenò (13 Dec 2009)
> # on behalf of QA team
> #
> # Pre-strip files (bug #241534), ignore flags (bug #241556),
> # misplaces documentation (bug #241560), bump request open
> # since August 2008 (bug #235888).
> #
> #
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 23:26:57 -0500
Jonathan Callen wrote:
> The following eclasses have been marked as deprecated for more than 2
> years, and as such have been removed from the tree:
> wxlib.eclass (deprecated in 2007)
revision 1.21
On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 15:56:45 +0100
Diego E. Pettenò wrote:
>
> # Diego E. Pettenò (29 Nov 2009)
> # on behalf of QA team
> #
> # Fails to build with recent kernel headers (bug #236449,
> # September 2008); ignores LDFLAGS (bug #231934); has
> # parallel make issues (bug #264671) and is pending
On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 23:28:57 +0100
Patrick Lauer wrote:
> And then why bother when the tree doesn't reflect PMS.
Maybe if some people would stop ignoring PMS on whim because they don't agree
with something in it this wouldn't be the case.
Like, when does this end? Whenever there's a policy you
On Sun, 1 Nov 2009 17:36:30 +0100
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote:
> Some packages have new releases more than once a month and sometimes it's
> reasonable
> to not skip stabilization of any version. Given version of a package is
> usually no
> longer tested by users after release of
On Fri, 30 Oct 2009 22:20:17 + (UTC)
Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
> Tomáš Chvátal posted on Fri, 30 Oct 2009 22:10:17 +0100 as excerpted:
>
> > The KDE3 support is being dropped with immediate effect. This means that
> > ebuilds are dropping KDE3 support where they were broken, or cla
On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 11:48:39 +0200
Petteri Räty wrote:
> James Cloos wrote:
> > When you first psoted this list I noticed some (or several?) live
> > ebuilds. Git- is the one I remember.
> >
> > Those should not get nuked during global cleanups, as they are likely to
> > be in active use no
On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 21:30:20 +0400
Peter Volkov wrote:
> В Срд, 14/10/2009 в 22:12 -0600, Ryan Hill пишет:
> > On Sun, 11 Oct 2009 13:11:14 +0200
> > Peter Hjalmarsson wrote:
> >
> > > Sorry for reviving an old thread, but was there any progress on this
> &
On Fri, 16 Oct 2009 23:29:00 - (UTC)
"Daniel Bradshaw" wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> It occurs to me that my work flow when doing updates follows a fairly
> predictable (and probably common) pattern.
> The obvious next step is to wonder why no one though of automating it...
>
> When doing updates I
On Sun, 11 Oct 2009 13:11:14 +0200
Peter Hjalmarsson wrote:
> Sorry for reviving an old thread, but was there any progress on this
> topic?
>
> With packages as dbus that breaks with FEATURES/USE="test" hand in hand
> with packages like dev-libs/gmp[1] there would really be nice to know if
> you
On Wed, 07 Oct 2009 16:46:36 +0200
Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote:
> Le mardi 06 octobre 2009 à 20:38 -0600, Ryan Hill a écrit :
> > Some packages, like dbus[1], have testing features that, while useful for
> > developers and arch-testers, aren't something that should be foisted
On Wed, 7 Oct 2009 13:36:47 +0200
Patrick Lauer wrote:
> On Wednesday 07 October 2009 13:13:31 Duncan wrote:
> > The proposal then
> > was to turn FEATURES=test on by default for a specific EAPI,
> ... which is never more than a proposal by people not fixing the packages.
> Just FYI, building g
Some packages, like dbus[1], have testing features that, while useful for
developers and arch-testers, aren't something that should be foisted on
users. Dbus' case is extreme, as it builds-in functions that are useful for
unit testing, but result in an insecure and unstable package (I just "fixed"
On Mon, 05 Oct 2009 04:03:28 +0200
Peter Hjalmarsson wrote:
> For FEATURES="test" a policy for how to handle stuff like:
>
> if use test; then
> elog
> ewarn "You have unit tests enabled, this results in an insecure
> library"
> ewarn "It is recom
On Sat, 03 Oct 2009 22:13:59 +0300
Samuli Suominen wrote:
> Since new binutils will support LD_AS_NEEDED="1" to force ld behave
> asneeded we could use this for the developer -target in profiles?
>
> Speak up if you think it's a terrible idea.
>
> Thanks, Samuli
>
>
I think it's a not terrib
On Sat, 03 Oct 2009 15:54:31 +0100
AllenJB wrote:
> I personally would happily donate my time to working on the docs, if
> only it didn't involve a markup language nobody else uses. I suggested a
> closed wiki for official documentation, but was again shot down saying
> that the existing team (wh
# Ryan Hill (26 Sep 2008)
# Mask net-p2p/nicotine for removal on 20091026. (bug #286607)
# Superseded by net-p2p/nicotine+, no activity since 2005.
net-p2p/nicotine
--
fonts, Character is what you are in the dark.
gcc-porting,
wxwidgets @ gentoo EFFD 380E 047A
On Thu, 24 Sep 2009 03:39:26 +0200
Maciej Mrozowski wrote:
> And this is the problem (some people may be even unaware of it).
> In pre EAPI-2 it was sufficient to do the following in live ebuilds:
>
> inherit ${some_eclass} ${scm_eclass}
>
> ${scm_eclass} inherited as last one, would just shado
On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 13:55:55 +0400
Alexey Shvetsov wrote:
> On Воскресенье 20 сентября 2009 11:47:30 Rémi Cardona wrote:
> > Le 20/09/2009 02:31, Ryan Hill a écrit :
> > > If not, when can
> > > we drop support for old EAPIs? Your opinions please.
> >
> &g
On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 15:07:23 +0200
Patrick Lauer wrote:
> On Sunday 20 September 2009 13:28:40 Richard Freeman wrote:
> > Ryan Hill wrote:
> > > So, should we always keep a working EAPI 0 version around? If not, when
> > > can we drop support for old EAPIs? Your op
(Yes, this has EAPI in the title, so that means everyone will chime in)
I'd like to clarify and (eventually) set in stone our ideas of best practices
when it comes to bumping EAPI for system packages. I was of the belief that
we had decided that system packages should remain at EAPI 0 for
backwar
On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 08:55:00 +1200
Alistair Bush wrote:
> > Stabilization of Python 3.1.* will be requested at the beginning of
> > november. There was a suggestion to create a news item which would inform
> > users that temporarily they shouldn't switch to Python 3 as their main
> > interpret
On Sat, 19 Sep 2009 15:35:08 -0400
Mark Loeser wrote:
> Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis said:
> > Stabilization of Python 3.1.* will be requested at the beginning of
> > november.
> > There was a suggestion to create a news item which would inform users that
> > temporarily they shouldn't s
On Sat, 12 Sep 2009 14:15:34 +0200
Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> Ryan Hill wrote:
> > Personally I don't see how gaming the system helps us in any way.
>
> I was afraid it could be read in such a way. Handing out fake version
> numbers would be much easier, wouldn
On Sat, 12 Sep 2009 01:02:44 +0200
Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> Among other information the Gentoo page at DistroWatch [1] displays a
> table on about 200 selected packages [2] and how up to date Gentoo is
> per package. I assume that DistroWatch is still one of the first places
> people go to get
On Mon, 7 Sep 2009 20:19:09 +0800
Xi Shen wrote:
> when i am trying to d/l the dmg2img ebuild, i found that the filename
> trying to d/l is 'download?dmg2img-1.6.tar.gz'. since th '?' mark has
> special mean in http/ftp, i cannot d/l the file. i have check many
> mirrors around the world, the res
On Sun, 30 Aug 2009 12:14:53 +0300
Petteri Räty wrote:
> Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote:
> > Python 2.4 is deprecated. There are plans to mask for removal it when
> > remaining packages incompatible with Python 2.5 are fixed.
> > (We will announce masking of Python 2.4 at least 1 month
wxlib.eclass was added years ago to consolidate code shared between all the
different wx* implementations in the tree. As the number of different wx*
implementations in the tree equals 1, and nothing has used this eclass in two
and a half years, it will be put down. While I think it's batshit ins
On Sat, 22 Aug 2009 22:22:54 +0200
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote:
> 2009-08-22 21:39:47 Ciaran McCreesh napisał(a):
> > On Sat, 22 Aug 2009 01:54:22 +0100
> > AllenJB wrote:
> > > Could there be room for "fast track" EAPI's to be considered on some
> > > occasions - eg. in this case
On Sat, 22 Aug 2009 01:32:33 -0400
Andrew D Kirch wrote:
> Ryan Hill wrote:
> > On Fri, 21 Aug 2009 17:29:12 -0700
> > Chip Parker wrote:
> >
> >
> >> If you were building a house, and the blueprints had been signed off
> >> on calling for 1 met
On Fri, 21 Aug 2009 21:56:41 +0100
David Leverton wrote:
> Does anyone have any opinions on which of the four options (#1
> make die respect nonfatal, #2 make die always die, #3 add a new
> die variant that respects nonfatal, #4 make regular die respect
> nonfatal, and add a new variant that does
On Fri, 21 Aug 2009 17:29:12 -0700
Chip Parker wrote:
> If you were building a house, and the blueprints had been signed off
> on calling for 1 meter high doors, but the builder had built in 2
> meter high doors, would you then go back to the builder and require
> him to do something that makes t
On Fri, 21 Aug 2009 16:25:35 +0200
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote:
> 2009-08-13 07:55:22 Ryan Hill napisał(a):
> > On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 19:46:56 +0100
> > Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 20:41:30 +0200
> > > Tomáš Chvátal
On Thu, 20 Aug 2009 11:02:23 +0100
Steven J Long wrote:
> Rémi Cardona wrote:
>
> > Le 18/08/2009 03:30, Steven J Long a écrit :
> > [snip]
> >
> > Steven,
> >
> > This thread was dead for more than 4 days. Yet you pick it up and you
> > try to pick a fight with Ciaran.
> >
> No I was answerin
On Thu, 13 Aug 2009 13:29:04 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 23:55:22 -0600
> Ryan Hill wrote:
> > > That's a seperate thing that needs EAPI control. You'll need to
> > > propose it for EAPI 4 if you want that.
> >
> > W
On Thu, 13 Aug 2009 10:27:26 +0300
Samuli Suominen wrote:
> Ryan Hill wrote:
> > It's best to keep the number of external packages needed to build the
> > toolchain to a bare minimum. Anything that isn't a hard requirement should
> > be a USE flag. We also need
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 19:46:56 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 20:41:30 +0200
> Tomáš Chvátal wrote:
> > Also we should allow the stuff as directory thingus (portage already
> > handles it right).
>
> That's a seperate thing that needs EAPI control. You'll need to propose
> it
On Thu, 13 Aug 2009 00:39:11 +0300
Samuli Suominen wrote:
> James Cloos wrote:
> > Nikos> I see that the "graphite" USE flag is disabled by default.
> > Nikos> Are there any known issues with this new optimizer?
> > It looks like debian has it enabled in their gcc-4.4 packages, and
> > I've not
On Tue, 4 Aug 2009 21:15:57 -0400
Mark Loeser wrote:
> I'd really like to unmask gcc-4.4.1 soon, as in the next week or so.
> If you could please install it and test it out, I would appreciate it.
> Also, if you have any gcc 4.4 porting bugs assigned to a herd that you
> are a part of, resolving
On Wed, 29 Jul 2009 22:49:20 +0200
"Diego E. 'Flameeyes'" Pettenò
wrote:
> +# Diego E. Pettenò (29
> Jul 2009)
> +# on behalf of QA Team
> +#
> +# Fails to build with gcc 4.3 (bug #240614), 4.4 (bug #278432) and
> mixes
> +# compiler flags (bug #199585).
> +#
> +# Removal on 2009-09-29
> +medi
# Ryan Hill (27 Jul 2009)
# Masked for removal 20090927
# - upstream dead since 2006
# - invalid homepage
# - many other typing tutors in the tree (ktouch, tuxtype, gtypist, klavaro)
# - doesn't work with wxGTK-2.8
# Bug #279431
app-misc/tipptrainer
--
gcc-po
On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 02:05:48 +0300
Mart Raudsepp wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-07-24 at 12:04 +0300, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> > Would it be OK if I change
> >
> > [-] profile - Adds support for software performance analysis (will
> > likely vary from ebuild to ebuild)
> >
> > To
> >
> > [-] pr
On Tue, 2 Jun 2009 19:39:57 +0100
David Leverton wrote:
> On Monday 01 June 2009 05:25:06 Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
> > Hello fellow developers and users.
> >
> > Nominations for the Gentoo Council 2009/2010 are now open for the next
> > two weeks (until 23:59 UTC, 14/06/2009).
>
> I wou
On Fri, 29 May 2009 23:49:26 +0200
Patrick Lauer wrote:
> On Friday 29 May 2009 04:12:04 Ryan Hill wrote:
> > Patrick Lauer wrote:
> > but ever consider that the reason people keep
> > repeating things to you is that you continually misunderstand what they're
> &g
On Thu, 28 May 2009 08:28:12 +0200
Patrick Lauer wrote:
> This is becoming a rather lengthy email ping pong, but as people seem to be
> unable to discuss things I had to highlight a few issues there.
I'm sorry to be rude, but ever consider that the reason people keep repeating
things to you is
On Wed, 20 May 2009 19:44:27 +0300
Petteri Räty wrote:
> Ryan Hill wrote:
> > Masked this a couple weeks ago but forgot to announce it:
> >
> > - old old old docs for the AFS file system, which get installed with
> > net-fs/openafs USE=doc anyways
> > - not touc
Masked this a couple weeks ago but forgot to announce it:
- old old old docs for the AFS file system, which get installed with
net-fs/openafs USE=doc anyways
- not touched since 2005
- unmaintained
--
gcc-porting, by design, by neglect
treecleaner,
On Sun, 17 May 2009 15:19:17 -0600
Ryan Hill wrote:
> On Sun, 17 May 2009 23:00:21 +0200
> Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote:
>
> > 2009-05-17 22:51:50 Ryan Hill napisał(a):
> > > On Sun, 17 May 2009 21:03:46 +0200
> > > Tiziano Müller wrote:
> >
On Sun, 17 May 2009 23:00:21 +0200
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote:
> 2009-05-17 22:51:50 Ryan Hill napisał(a):
> > On Sun, 17 May 2009 21:03:46 +0200
> > Tiziano Müller wrote:
> > > So, unless you're doing a pkgmove
> > > it's a danger
On Sun, 17 May 2009 20:40:41 + (UTC)
Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
> Ryan Hill posted
> 2009051752.133c7...@halo.dirtyepic.sk.ca, excerpted below, on Sun, 17
> May 2009 11:11:52 -0600:
>
> >> Do we want to document the following? (do we have already?
On Sun, 17 May 2009 21:03:46 +0200
Tiziano Müller wrote:
> Am Sonntag, den 17.05.2009, 11:11 -0600 schrieb Ryan Hill:
> > On Fri, 15 May 2009 23:31:25 +0200
> > Tiziano Müller wrote:
> >
> > > Wrong. For example:
> > > - stuff like docompress may chang
On Sun, 17 May 2009 19:18:14 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sun, 17 May 2009 12:15:24 -0600
> Ryan Hill wrote:
> > I'd like 2 if we could have multiple same-versioned ebuilds of
> > different EAPI. 3 is good enough for me.
>
> We couldn't. Allowing multipl
On Sun, 17 May 2009 17:56:06 +0200
Piotr Jaroszyński wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have just updated GLEP 55 [1], hopefully making it a bit clearer.
>
> Just FYI, my order of preference of solutions is:
>
> 1. EAPI-suffixed ebuilds (obviously)
> 2. EAPI in the filename with one-time extension change
>
On Thu, 14 May 2009 03:32:12 +0300
Mart Raudsepp wrote:
> Project maintainer-wanted
> =
>
> Abstract:
> There are currently quite some package requests (over 3000) languishing
> on bugzilla waiting for a developer or team to get interested and
> package it in the official
On Fri, 15 May 2009 23:31:25 +0200
Tiziano Müller wrote:
> Wrong. For example:
> - stuff like docompress may change the content being installed depending
> on the package manager
> - --disable-static (maybe in a later EAPI) changes content
> - slot-dep-operators change the rdepend of installed pa
Could I ask that people stop closing bugs against the gold linker with
such classy witticisms as "patches welcome". There is no patch a user can
provide to make a package build with the gold linker. These bugs should be
assigned to toolchain, not the maintainer of the package that gold happens to
On Mon, 11 May 2009 23:29:10 +1200
Alistair Bush wrote:
> I would assume it would be better to directly test whether the user is
> root, than test that userpriv is set?
AFAIK:
if [[ ${EUID} -eq 0 ]]; then
rootstuff
else
nonrootstuff
fi
But for tests that fail with userpriv just because the
On Wed, 6 May 2009 08:49:53 +0200
Christian Faulhammer wrote:
> Hi,
>
> any project lead/member can post an answer to this mail for a status
> report:
I miss these. ;)
GCC-Porting:
Thanks to a load of help from darkside, loki_val, fauli, and others, GCC 4.3
is now stable on our primary archs
On Sun, 10 May 2009 10:41:03 +0100
David Leverton wrote:
> On Sunday 10 May 2009 09:58:22 Ryan Hill wrote:
> > On Sun, 10 May 2009 02:00:17 -0600
> >
> > Ryan Hill wrote:
> > > You can't test FEATURES in an ebuild. It's portage-specific.
> &
On Sun, 10 May 2009 02:00:17 -0600
Ryan Hill wrote:
> On Sun, 10 May 2009 07:38:43 +
> "Samuli Suominen (ssuominen)" wrote:
>
> > ssuominen09/05/10 07:38:43
> >
> > Modified: ChangeLog cdrdao-1.2.2-r3.ebuild
> > Log:
&g
On Sun, 10 May 2009 07:38:43 +
"Samuli Suominen (ssuominen)" wrote:
> ssuominen09/05/10 07:38:43
>
> Modified: ChangeLog cdrdao-1.2.2-r3.ebuild
> Log:
> Doesn't compile with distcc wrt #264170.
> (Portage version: 2.1.6.13/cvs/Linux x86_64)
> +pkg_setup() {
> + i
On Thu, 09 Apr 2009 19:20:39 +0300
Mart Raudsepp wrote:
> All developers should enable it (a QA enforcement), but users by default
> - no, NO.
> There is more to a distribution than technical considerations.
Yes, please, and can we do it now? I am frankly sick of failing testsuites
and would r
On Thu, 9 Apr 2009 23:36:16 +0530
Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 10:15 PM, Tiziano Müller wrote:
> > roughly 90% packages depending on one of:
> >
> > sys-libs/db
>
> Why the hell does this have so many slots in-tree? I am unaware of the
> reasons for it. Horribly changed API
On Mon, 6 Apr 2009 08:21:07 +0200
Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> Is the following description for the category metadata O.K.?
> More translations are welcome.
>
> en: The www-plugins category contains plugins for Web browsers.
> de: Die Kategorie www-plugins enthält Plugins für Webbrowser.
en_CA: The
On Sat, 04 Apr 2009 17:57:54 +
"Fabian Groffen (grobian)" wrote:
> grobian 09/04/04 17:57:54
>
> Modified: flag-o-matic.eclass
> Log:
> backport fix for x86-macos in filter-flags from Prefix
>
> Revision ChangesPath
> 1.133eclass/flag-o-matic.eclas
On Mon, 23 Mar 2009 11:51:28 +0100
Fabian Groffen wrote:
> On 23-03-2009 11:41:08 +0100, Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> > People split into three groups:
> >
> > - Friends of ${P}-fix-issue.patch naming
> > - Friends of ${PN}-fix-issue.patch naming
> > - Friends of ${PN}-1.2.3-fix-issue.p
On Mon, 23 Mar 2009 09:04:32 +0100
Alin Năstac wrote:
> I suppose what everyone does in their part of the tree is their
> business, but a small subset of packages I maintain have other
> maintainers as well. It is annoying to see rules you assume being
> respected on your ebuilds being broken at
On Mon, 23 Mar 2009 06:55:48 +0100
Jeroen Roovers wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Mar 2009 17:55:38 -0600
> Ryan Hill wrote:
>
> > These herds have no members:
>
> > ... <
>
> > live-cd:
> > app-admin/pwgen
> > app-arch/pbzip2
> > app-misc/live
On Sun, 22 Mar 2009 17:38:16 -0700
"Robin H. Johnson" wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 05:55:38PM -0600, Ryan Hill wrote:
> > secure-tunneling:
> > net-analyzer/mping
> > net-misc/corkscrew
> > net-misc/ghamachi
> > net-misc/hamachi
> > ne
On Mon, 23 Mar 2009 01:19:26 +0100
Alin Năstac wrote:
> Fine, then remove $PV from patch name and use it in any ebuild version
> you want. Or just decouple the patch version from the ebuild version
> (foo-bar-r1.patch sounds OK to me).
No. It's done this way for a reason.
--
gcc-porting,
These herds have no members:
afterstep:
net-mail/asmail
x11-plugins/asapm
x11-plugins/asclock
x11-plugins/ascpu
x11-plugins/asmem
x11-plugins/asmon
x11-plugins/astime
x11-wm/afterstep
Upstream is willing to maintain, just needs a contact.
https://bugs.gentoo.org/180765
--
secure-tunneling:
net-
401 - 500 of 906 matches
Mail list logo
